Blitzkreig wrote:Please give some semblence of a logical arguement you simply say that he's a bad president because people died, like under almost EVERY president.
Its not becasue people died, its becasue he didnt' have a clear strategy going into the war, its fairly obvious to anyone who has a basic grasp of politics that if you get rid of the current government, you need a replacement. He dind't think the war through ahead of time. In fact, more people are probably dieing from the chaos in the streets than from Sadaam's genocide.
He also got rid of Colin Powell, the only person in his cabinet to be hesitant about going into the war because they dindt' have sufficient evidence.
Joe McCarthy wrote:oh yeah, and it hardly even mattered what FEMA did in Katrina. The state and local governments handled things so badly it was almost like they were trying to make it worse.
in other words: since its a futile effort, he might as well just stay out on his ranch clearing brush while theres a national crisis going on instead of trying to get something done, getting on the mayor's back and trying to get everything going smoothly.
He also happneed to appoint the head of FEMA, who he only hired because of personal ties, granted a lot fo presidents grant positions based on personal ties, but usually its some insignificant position liek ambassador to some random country, and if it is a significant position at least make sure they guy is somewhat competent. How can it take 5 hours after a tsunami hits to do anything, espdecially when you can see the tsunami coming for at least a half hour before hand.
Bush may not be directly responsible, but he IS responsible for appointing heads of FEMA who had absolutely no disaster management experience.